Pages

Saturday, March 14, 2015

Let's polish your financial and accounting skills. What price would you put on the stock of the following Fort Lauderdale based company?
Their Investor Relations web site reads as follows (minus a few crossed-out words to keep the suspense going):

"The Xxxxxxx, Inc. is an American entrepreneurial “emerging growth” company with a brand and xxxx that is widely followed throughout the nation. We believe that xxxxxxx is the “new xxxxx”. The Xxxxxxx is a fast growing, early mover in the xxxxxxx industry. Management believes that we are one of the most followed xxxxxxx on Facebook, and we believe we are the only known xxxxxxx verified by Twitter.

Many quality xxxxxxxxxxx go into every xxxxxxxx we make which is what we believe elevates our xxxxxxxxxx above the rest and why people line up in front of our xxxxxx sometimes for over an hour to get one of our xxxxxxxxx creations. Our goal is to make people happy with our xxxx.

Our xxxxxxx have received numerous accolades, including being listed as one of the best xxxxxxxxxx in the country."

Don't let their "Management believes" and "we believe" statements throw you off. Clearly, both were made by the same person (natural or legal). Let's remember that the speed of growth associated with start-ups often results in simple message mistakes like this one. Now that you can call me old fashion, but I am not sure of the bragging value from being "verified" by Twitter.
And in case you doubt it, the company is real. It's even publicly traded. Their latest 10Q shows revenue at just over $995K, That's "K" as in Thousands.
COGS show at over $920K, and Total Operating Expenses at $959K.
Like with any other up-and-coming company, their 18 million shares-outstanding trade with some volatility. The recent market correction pushed this company's stock down by 29%.

Key assets are deployed in LA and Phoenix

Their key assets are deployed in two important metropolitan areas: Los Angeles, CA and Phoenix, AZ.
As for their balance sheet, liabilities equate to 280% of their assets; thus leaving them with a stockholder's deficit rather than the usual equity. Translation, their founders either blew up all their money or have no skin in the game. Both are bad, if you wonder.
But the market is nonetheless quite confident. That much is evidenced by their rich valuation. How rich, you ask? Well, have you guessed how much capitalization do they deserve?
Say you give up.
Wall street has valued their shares-outstanding at a whopping $71,000,000; which is down from their recent valuation in excess of $100,000,000.
What? These guys are insolvent and losing money by the boat load. Why would anyone give them more funds? Their negative Cash Flows from Operations amount to about 250% of their revenues. Are investors off their tree?
But wait, something important must be missing among all these facts. Why else would financial experts dish out such rich valuation for what amounts to garbage, right?
Let's see, their President / interim CFO has an MBA from the University of Miami. Meanwhile, the CEO has an undergraduate from Jarvis Christian College. Could their pedigree be the reason for so much market good faith?
If you haven't taken a look at the company's name by clicking on the 10Q link above, let me share that the special product they tout is a cheese sandwich... Well, a "gourmet" cheese sandwich. So their main assets deployed are food trucks. To be exact, we are talking about four (4) food trucks.

Is it possible that each of these trucks will deliver value in excess of $17 Million?
I thought long and hard and continue to be convinced that the trucks must be special. Certainly a mission critical project like theirs calls for military-spec vehicles with anti-ballistic features and vertical jet liftoff capabilities...
... and it goes without saying that the cheese used in their splendid sandwiches must carry self-propelled cancer-fighting nano-agents...
... all features that are highly valued by beer guzzling fairground attendees in LA and Phoenix.

At this moment, I feel the need to clarify that I hope no one has been hurt by my sarcasm.

... drum roll please...

The name of the company is The Grilled Cheese Truck, Inc. I think that it vividly illustrates the orgasmic nature of the Wall Street party that is taking place right now; thanks to the keg sponsors at the Federal Reserve.

Two days ago, I proposed that the presently inflated stock market valuations were not a sign of economic health.

Even the best marketing guys I know can't come up with this much fluff-ware.
Financial bubbles anyone?

Friday, March 13, 2015

They claim the recovery is solid. Just look at the stock market, they say.

CNBC's Steve Liesman

Economists like CNBC's Steve Liesman and investment peddlers everywhere insist that the seemingly unstoppable stock market climb is a sign that all is rosy within the US economy. After all, they say, isn't the stock market a price-discovery mechanism intended to value all information about the economy instantaneously?
Well, yes and no. The stock market, like any other market, acts as a pricing tool. Where things go bad is that it is now being distorted by the massive gravitational presence of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet. Never before in history did a single entity monetization so much. Never before did markets have to deal with such a large distortion. Let's take a close look at a sector that I feel disproves their allegations.

Visiting the Federal Reserve's own website, one can easily see that retail sales at department stores across the nation have collapsed. Things are so bad that I will suggest you take pictures of all the anchor stores next time you visit the mall. In no time, your images of formerly well known dinosaurs will appreciate in value.
But not all is bad of course. Noise is never so simple to clean. The fact remains that a continuously growing US population has made the size of the buying market larger; thus helping grow total US retail sales. Yet, all benefits from such market growth seem to have completely missed department stores across the nation. Just look at the Fed's chart above; department store revenue has fallen to scary levels. As a result, there's even talk about how these players are failing to entice new buyers as they continue to lose old ones.
But don't say I didn't warn you. While my forecast for the beginning of 2015 was a little lower than where things are now, I had told you in my article back in July, 2013 that Department Store sales would continue to plummet. Well, they did.

Surprisingly, though, none of these terrible facts is reflected in their stock valuations. As things have turned worse, stock prices of companies like Macy's, Dillard's and Nordstrom continue to increase; just as if revenue performance was stellar.
So, how is this possible? Isn't bad sales data supposed to push stock prices lower?
While we all know that the stock market can behave irrationally in the short term, we still trust that long term price performance correlates with fundamental health. But as it should now be clear, we are witnessing an anomaly.The expected poor stock price is conspicuously missing. Current valuations rather reflect boom times.
Thanks to the disruptive effect of the Federal Reserve's Balance Sheet, department stores are being rewarded for carrying a poor business model that sports an upcoming expiration date.
The Fed's massive money printing has created the ideal environment for capital misallocation. So the story repeats: excess money is put in the wrong hands and... boom, a bubble pops. Let's hope that shrapnel doesn't hurt innocent people this time around.
If you still believe that the market is really serving as proof of a healthy US economy, don't worry; I have a couple of other posts that will destroy your thesis. Until then, enjoy the volatility.

Friday, December 12, 2014

It is generally believed that life insurance is only for those who aren't wealthy. This is because people tend to think of life insurance as a way to cover the needs of a destitute widow and her children. But nothing could be further from the truth.

A life insurance policy is a high-leverage financial instrument like no other. It also enjoys unique tax treatment privileges equal to no none. In a nutshell, there isn't a single financial product that can deliver the power of markets in a single laser-focused product. It can uniquely add liquidity at a time when illiquid assets turn your net-worth into no more than meaningless data noise.
Let me sound the warning bell for those running a successful business, those who are asset rich and those who are passing through the most productive time in their lives. By no means should you assume that there is no place for an insurance policy just because money seems to rain all around you. Last I checked, those who earn big also take on larger bets. And it is these bets that can drain liquidity at the worst moment.
There's a simple way to determine the absolute lowest amount of life insurance needed by an individual; including these asset rich billionaires.

In the video link above, CNBC discusses how even the mega-rich must have life insurance to cover the cash needed for the so called death taxes and for paying off all loans outstanding. Here is the formula in detail:

Min Coverage = All Debt + Possible Capital Gains + (0.45 x Net-Worth)

The formula is simple. Total all your outstanding loans. They are going to get called after death. If you don't have the cash to pay for them now, how exactly will your family do it then?
Then add any capital gains from the sale of assets that may need to be liquidated. Here, a guesstimate would be preferred to doing nothing. In any case, this is not the biggest factor within the formula.
Finally, add 45% of all your net-worth. It will be owed to the IRS in the form of estate tax; which is often referred to as death tax. Ask yourself: would you be able to immediately write the IRS a check for 45% of all your assets? No? What a surprise.
While an argument can be made that, for many, estate taxes are irrelevant due to the aggregate value of assets falling below the $5.25 Million minimum for 2013, I would like to warn against quick conclusions; especially when a business is part of the estate transfer. Keep in mind that without mark-to-market price discovery it would be difficult to set a price for the business that the IRS would agree with. You may think that for tax reasons, your business is not very valuable as an inheritance. Surely soon after, the IRS will disagree. Would you like to pick a fight with the IRS about how much taxes they should collect based on such business valuation? Would you like to have your heirs take on the challenge without your help instead? With the cost of term life insurance being so low, the risk/reward ratio favors erring on the side of having to pay estate taxes.

Do note the caveat that no part of the resulting amount will be targeted to cover death related expenses, wealth transfer costs or replace any lost future earnings. This calculation will only serve to preserve the value of assets already held. That's it; just asset-loss elimination. As a result, I find that insuring for anything less would be irresponsible since the certainty of taxes and loan calls is always high.This back-of-the-napkin calculation can simplify the decision of how much to protect as a minimum. Am I then suggesting that this is all the insurance you need? Of course NOT. You should also cover the value of all future productivity and hedge other business and family risks.
My goal here is humble. I want to simply show those who are successful today that their net-worth is not as much of a reliable hedge as they originally thought; that their asset wealth may not be enough to cover everything life brings. Look deeper into it. There are plenty of inexpensive solutions available.

Finally here is the caveat de rigueur:This material is provided for educational purposes only and is not intended to be legal, financial or fiscal advise. Please seek the advise of a licensed professional in your state.

Friday, June 27, 2014

I strongly recommend all employers in Florida become familiar with Gulfstream Goodwill Academy. This incredible institution educates individuals with disabilities. It then readies them for successful integration into the work place.

I know from experience that incorporating programs like these into a business' strategy is both, very rewarding at every level and a fantastic way to increase customer and employee loyalty. In a nutshell, everyone wins. If interested, reach out to Laila Seagle at (561) 259-1000

Saturday, June 21, 2014

—For our purpose here, it makes no difference if your company was exposed to other risks through medical, legal or any other services or products.—

Here's a business owner's nightmare scenario. Let's say that your company uses hazardous materials in its daily operations.Let's also say that despite doing everything right to protect your workers, an employee finds a complaint and gets a hold of an attorney.
But this happens to be more than just an attorney.
This guy is good... I mean, bad; depending on whether he's on your side or is playing against you. This attorney has an astute modus operandi that diverges from the norm and which is quite effective. This guy sues you and your company.
But he has no interest in winning the court-battle. No!Judicial Harassment is more like torture. Pain is the main factor driving results. The more intense and personal the pain he can exert on you, the better his chances at getting what he wants.
After proving that there was damage to his client, he will ask that the court safeguard the money that could be used to pay his client's compensation. He will ask that your accounts be frozen.He knows that most small business owners pay personal expenses through their company in an attempting to reduce tax liabilities. Many businesses follow the advice of their CPA's. They create pass-through companies and show no income at the end of the year.
It is therefore easy for this lawyer to show that you have previously taken money out of the company for non-business related expenses. He will next argue that you will certainly be tempted to doing it again; thus putting at risk his ability to properly gain indemnity for his client.
Depending on the case, this hassle will even disrupt normal cash operations in the business. Thus, the risk of crippling the company is very real. Remember that his chances of winning increase as he cranks up the pain.

The net result is always the same. You won't be able to pay your mortgage, your cars or a number of important expenses. Under the circumstances, you won't be able to get an income increase to compensate for your now strained cash position. If you did, the judge would probably respond with strong punitive measures; never a good thing.

In a nutshell, you could easily lose your property; which is the essential part of the Harassment. Just think of the fact that it always takes a long time for a case to go through the courts. How long could you hold your breath underwater? It may be over a year before you can prove your innocence to the judge.
Inevitably, you will probably give up and settle. He wins!
Yes, you and every small business are just one bad-attorney away from a scenario like this. Perhaps more depressing is the fact that more successful companies make better targets as the bounty collected by the pirates could be much greater. And for those who pay the price once, the chances for a repeat are greater yet, once the word spreads.Companies may go for decades without experiencing a single frivolous law suit. But this is a case where past experience does not offer a certain view at what the future will bring. Moreover, I find questioning the probabilities that you could experience Judicial Harassment to be misguided.
If a solution was costlier that the problem, I could see why ignore the issue. But since the cure is simple, valuable to you and your family, and may be used for other purposes, the real question should be why not?
You see, this is no ordinary protection. It isn't like liability or car insurance, which expire worthless every year and which serve no other purpose.
Section 7702 of the IRS code allows for the creation of an impenetrable fund where money is protected from dirty attorneys and other predators. They just can't claw their way into the money.These funds are completely under your control and could be structured to have a high degree of liquidity for these or many other emergencies. They can be structured to benefit from tax deferred growth. Tax free access to the money is even possible when well designed. And perhaps the best part is that in case that you are never under threat of Judicial Harassment, the money continues to grow under your control and available for your retirement or gifting needs down the line. Despite mentioning it before, it is worth writing it again: Unlike derivative options or other types of hedging mechanisms, which lose value every day, these solutions continue to grow their worth over time.
Intrigued? Ask your professional advisers about how to use 7702 for this and other business risks.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

You’ve poured a lifetime of sweat, time, and capital into building your business. You’ve begun thinking about retirement. Your strategy is to sell your company for a good price, settle back, and enjoy a financially secure retirement. But, like many business owners, you’ve made the mistake of assuming this scenario will happen, and you haven’t bothered to make any other retirement plans.

My advice to you? Be realistic. What are the odds there will be a person showing up at your doors at the right time, with cash in hand and willing to buy your business for a fair price? For thousands of small business owners each year, no buyers ever ring the bell.
Perhaps your business is too specialized or is tied too closely to the owner’s unique personality and skills. Then there is the chance that potential buyers may equate a retirement sale with a distressed opportunity; subsequently making only low-ball offers. Whatever the reasons, many owners find that their company has suddenly become a white elephant that nobody wants.
But here is a thought: select and develop a successor. Prime a replacement; someone who will buy your company when you’re ready to retire. You could even look at your current co-owner. Just be careful if she is about the same age as you. Retirement plans may coincide for the two of you.
The, how about your son or daughter? Are they active in the business? Could you look at a younger key employee? Business owners who successfully groom their own replacements leave nothing to chance. They realize that there’s no room for error at the point of retirement.
Be cautious nonetheless; make sure your heir apparent is the right person in terms of temperament, personality, competence, and personal goals.

Nurture a buyer, write a buy-sell agreement and fund the deal with insurance. That simple!

But don't look for yourself. Being compatible does not mean being identical. You are not looking for a twin but for a potential leader who can do things as well as you, but differently.
Set up a probation period so you can terminate the relationship if you find that this person will not work out. During that period, keep everything as informal as possible; strictly verbal. Even when you go to a formal agreement, make sure it contains a termination provision. It's important to reduce your risk's profile while you engage the search.
Offer incentives to ensure that your replacement stays until the baton is passed. An ambitious successor needs and deserves gradually increasing authority and benefits. Options should include deferred compensation or the opportunity to acquire partial ownership prior to your retirement. This provides both parties with something to win by sticking to the agreement, and something to lose if it falls apart.
Create a buy-sell agreement. With the help of your attorney, lock in who does and gets what, spelling out all details and caveats, including how to establish the final valuation of the business. This formal agreement protects everybody.
Build in a funding mechanism. This is of crucial as funding is why most deals fall through despite even the best buy-sell agreement terms. Any plan is worthless without the money.
Under one option, the successor may be able to purchase the company from ongoing profits. Other options include setting up a sinking fund or allowing the successor to simply borrow the money. These options may work but they leave much to chance.

Life insurance is a flexible financial instrument available to any business owner

Instead, consider a funding vehicle that also protects your family in the event of your disability or premature death, such as life and disability income insurance. You would be surprised what can be done with a properly structured life insurance policy. Your insurance professional or your independent professional advisers can work with you to help you develop a sound business strategy.
Alternatively, have a Plan B. As a business owner, you know that very few things go exactly as planned. What if your business hits tough times or your successor dies, becomes disabled, or leaves because of a personality conflict? Or what if there simply is no heir apparent waiting in the wings? Sometimes, your only alternative may be to dissolve the business. Be ready. It is after all the route most often taken.
Now that, if you dislike the idea of fading your business away, then you have no alternative but to begin mapping out your retirement strategy today. What are you waiting for?

Friday, March 7, 2014

A dropping unemployment rate says jobs are coming back. Unfortunately, main street can't see the improvements. Why not blame Boomers?
Come to find out that the unemployment rate has dropped because workers are leaving the job market and not because of job creation.
Normally, disillusioned workers would be a terrible indicator of a failing system. So, to make us feel better, our leaders are blaming Boomers. Their story is that only retiring Boomers are departing the job market in large numbers because of age. But the argument seems convenient at best. As the government loses track of millions of workers who have fallen out of the labor market, our leaders in Washington are missing a few hints.
It turns out that it doesn't make sense to blame Boomers.
First, Boomers are not like their parents. Members of the Greatest Generation liked telling stories of war as they chilled under the porch. Boomers, on the other hand, are much more active. They dislike both dependency and immobility.
From early on, Boomers' free spirit drove them to change the rules to society. Starting with the role of women, they then demystified sex and even found a place for drugs. As their personal productivity increased, they became the biggest spenders in the history of the planet.
But spenders they are no more. You see, Boomers are kind of broke. They do not have enough money to retire. So, they will have to continue to work longer than their parents to make ends meet.
How can I be sure? Well, if they had enough to retire, we would witness great signs of celebration honoring their accomplishments; from parties, to travel, to spoiling grand kids. Boomers have left no doubt about their desire to do everything bigger, better and faster than any other generation. But I just don't see the indication that this is taking place.

Labor Participation Rates vs. Recessions
(by Thomson Reuters)

Moreover, if boomers were truly preparing for retirement, we would see great asset liquidations. As a result, there would be massive drops in the price of everything from Harley Davidson motorcycles to fishing boats. While this may still take place a few years from today, it isn't retirement that's in the minds of Boomers right now. They still think they can ride the Harley without much back pain.
So what's pushing Labor Participation Rates down? Who are the workers giving up looking for jobs?
If my assumption is correct, a different large group must be leaving the work force in place of Boomers.
It is evident in the Labor Participation Rate chart above that rates peaked at the end of the 90's. More recently, rates have collapsed further after the recession ended. Unlike with all other recessions in the chart, this one failed to rebound, even after a prolonged period of time.

Who is missing?

Labor Participation Rate (65 years and over)

Looking at the Labor Participation Rate for those ages 65 and above, there is no doubt that they have not given up. The chart is clearly on a sustained uptrend which started in the mid 90's.
Honestly, the clear lack of correlation between this and the chart of the total Participation left me stunned as I reviewed the information. While I did not believe the story promoted by many mainstream economists, I certainly did not expect for this age bracket to contradict the trend by such large margin.

Labor Participation Rate (55 to 64 years)

Now look at workers between the ages of 55 and 64. While their participation is flattening, it has certainly not dropped in sympathy with total participation.
I should probably highlight that the probability of a sudden change in direction of an uptrend is very low. It is much more probable that these uptrends move sideways as they exhaust the energy that pushed them higher.
So far, these two charts corroborate my suggestion that Baby-Boomers are not moving towards retirement yet. There is no doubt that at some point they will, as it is natural. We will simply have to wait longer.

If not Boomers, then who?

Labor Participation Rate (16 to 24 years)

Let's look at the other side of the spectrum. Thus far we know that many 16 to 24 year olds still live at home with their parents, have large tuition debt and display a higher degree of entitlement than other generations. Could these characteristics show on Labor Participation? You bet!
Perhaps counterintuitively, this group has been pushed further and further out of the labor force. The decline in the chart dates to the end of the 90's. Furthermore, the recent declines are very robust in nature. You see, when we discuss impacts on demographics, we tend to focus mainly on Baby-Boomers because they are the largest single group that can easily affect economy. But what we often miss is that their children, the Millennials, are showing up in two larger waves. In the aggregate, there are more Millennials than Baby-Boomers. It thus makes sense that Millenials would also create seismic shifts on the economy.

Labor Participation Rate (25 to 54 years)

Now look at the group in the middle. Definitely, the 25 to 54 years group dictates the main shape of the total participation rate curve. Meanwhile the 16 to 24 years group determines the acceleration. Together, these last two groups oppose the positive influence of those who are closer to retirement.
That these charts completely contradict the general consensus among economists who think that Labor Participation drops are due to Baby-Boomer retiring is not surprising. We live in a world where everybody is afraid of being exceptional. Everyone follows everyone else; even if it means we all end up in the precipice.
This is one more piece of evidence that the stories served by our nation's leadership are bogus at best. Our Presient would like us to believe that jobs are coming back thanks to his great economic projects. But the reality behind the scenes is different. Boomers are having to work longer to pay for retirement. With a lack of jobs, Boomers face accepting lower paying jobs; something that takes entry level jobs away from younger professionals.
We are letting headlines distort our economic impressions in a way that directly contradicts our intuition. In a nutshell, the country is broken and our leadership is either driving disinformation or they have no idea on how to better our position.

Friday, February 28, 2014

Anyone who has visited my Blog has probably noted the US Debt counter on the right side of the main page. To me, national debt is a serious issue.
While my biggest concern has to do with what's done with the money borrowed, the overall amount is also hard to ignore.
Whether we pay the money through loosing buying power due to inflation or through income confiscation (taxes), the amount we owe is so large that there is just no way for our present generation to pay for it. As a result, it will be our children who are left with the bill.
But in every family, there is someone who just does not understand the problem of spending. Most of them see government as a kind of deity (God) who has the power to create money from thin air. What they miss is that the problem is not about the creation of the money but the creation of value.

To pay a trillion in debt to the
Chinese, we need about
1,500 Empire Estate Buildings

For example, if the Chinese lend us a trillion dollars, we will have to give them a document that promises we will pay in ten years. Such document is a 10 year treasury bond. Well, in ten years, the Chinese will come back to get paid. But we will have to give them something of value. They will want to trade their bond for corn, cars or famous buildings. Of course that they will be fine with first receiving cash that they can then exchange for the Empire Estate Building and a few other landmarks. But what do you think will happen if the money we give them is not good? They will certainly refuse to accept dollars and would rather get paid with the buildings directly. After all, the money they lend us has value when we borrow it. They expect the same in return.
This is exactly what happened with German money after the first World War. The country was broke and as a result their money was worthless, So, the rest of Europe demanded to get paid with gold and other valuables.
Now think. Would you like the US government to come to your house in ten years and tell you that you have just lost your house to the Chinese as payment for the money Uncle Sam borrowed ten years before? What if they tell you that your house is exactly your fair portion of the total amount owed? Would such fairness make you feel any better? Do you think that it is fair for the Chinese not to get paid instead?
But you may be thinking that the government just prints money that the Chinese can then use to buy whatever they want. But the question is: if the government can just print money out of thin air, why did it had to borrow in the first place? The answer is because they can print money but not value. To pay the Chinese back, Uncle Sam will have to take your money or your goods. It is as simple as that.
If we are a nation that does things right, we need to have a good plan on how we will pay for what we spend before we use the money.

President Obama, in his attempts to take advantage of the public's ignorance, claims that we should raise the debt limit because we should pay what we owe. With this, Obama uses the high moral ground as his argument without explaining how money payments really work. By the time he is done, Obama will double the debt accumulated by all US Presidents combined.
It's not about not wanting to pay. The US has the best credit in the world because we do pay. Instead, it's about making sure we don't default. The best way to prevent default is to spend within our means. Unfortunately, this is at the core of our incompetence. We just can't do it. We love to talk about spending money for fireman and teachers even when it isn't our money we are giving away.
To see how ridiculous this situation is, look at this video.

Rather than making things complex by using national debt, the video simplifies things by putting everything within the context of family in debt. Make sure to share the article with anyone who needs to understand the topic better. Let's be more responsible. Enjoy!

Thursday, February 27, 2014

In what seems like a repeat of 2007, macro-indicators continue to soften. Just like in 2007, the reasons behind the shift abound. But if history rhymes, we may be witnessing the next cyclical downturn.
Today, the Jobless Claims report surprised experts with a 348,000 claims headline. Before to the announcement, the expected range was between 330,000 and 345,000. The prior report was adjusted down 2,000 to 334,000; thus making the current report a substantial increase.
Since the report is volatile in nature, it is always best to use a moving average when looking at the data.
So when could we expect confirmation of a failed recovery in jobs? Cycle theory advocates concur that any time in 2014. Their idea is that markets oscillate in a fairly periodic basis and that it is now time for the next swing lower.
Demographers generally agree. Demographers look at the effect that Baby-boomers have on the overall economy.
Just remember that these are not sharp points on a graph but rather a slow turning curve. So, keep an eye on the broad trends.
Look at this morning's Jobless Claims chart.

Jobless Claims data by Haver Analytics

Today, new data continued to build on a trend that started during the third quarter of last year. If the bad weather argument holds, the 4 week moving average (the cyan line) will soon correct down.
But if the thesis fails, we should be challenging the top end of the larger trend, which is marked by the channel I drew over the chart. There is a strong chance that in about seven to eight weeks we will test the channel's integrity with the 4 week moving average line. The target is near 350,000 claims.
As we approach the upper channel band, the chart may display a bit of volatility (noise). But soon after, we will know the outcome.
Even if the resulting trend moves sideways at a 350,000 level after breaking above the channel, it would still be a confirmation that the so called recovery in jobs failed.
Why is employment important? Well, because the consumer is a massive portion of the US economy.
Yes, I am geeking out with the technical chart analysis this morning.

02-27-2014 10:14 AM Update:Consumer Electronics expert Barry Vogel made a very relevant comment in my LinkedIn page:To my way of thinking, the jobless reports and related reports are a meaningless exercise. When the vast majority of jobs created are minimum wage or near minimum replacing solid middle class jobs, the numbers are meaningless. When people are forced out of the workforce before they wish to retire, the numbers are worthless. When formerly hard working people have given up after failing to find meaningful employment after more than a year, the numbers are an insult. To your point, the economy is far more fragile than anyone cares to admit. I do not believe that we have recovered. The economy could not stand on its own without being propped up by government spending. We are just one major financial blow away from disaster at any time.This was my response:You are very correct Barry. The Unemployment report, which is reported separately, fails to include (1) people with expired benefits and (2) those with part time jobs who would rather have full time employment. But if today's Jobless Claims report increase, as it is now evident, then things would be worse than you have clearly noted. It's a bit of bad on top of bad.

Today, the National Association of Home Builders' Housing Market Index shocked the world of academia by revealing a negative confidence level among US builders. Considering that any number below 50 is bad news, last month's 56 was pretty OK; especially now that we convinced ourselves that mediocrity is the new recovery normal. Experts anticipated a number between 54 and 58. Now imagine their surprise when the news of an silly 46 hit the wire.
Naturally, the immediate reaction was to blame the weather. And why not? Everybody is blaming the weather.

US builders aren't sissies

But if I know something about builder greed is that it is stronger than the weather. Think of all the great construction feats that took place in this country over the last couple of centuries. From trains to bridges, builders are anything but sissies.
Does this mean that something else may be at fault? Well, how about Greed's balancing partner: Fear?
Back on May of last year, I covered the real estate market in an article called Robust Real Estate Hides Truth. There, I described the fundamental issues challenging the industry. But lets bring everybody up to date on those issues.
Last year, homes were being sold too cheaply for builders to want to compete. This is because, after inflation, it was more expensive to build a house than to buy one built ten years ago. This is especially true when investors where the main market buyers. Remember that investors buy wholesale. The retail consumer had no chance to compete because homes were being appraised about 15% below the asking price while bids were being made 10% above ask. This meant that only buyers with a 20% to 30% of extra cash at hand could play the bidding game.

FHA buyers were out of luck last year

Then consider the fact that this was an environment where the banking system failed to fully come back as a source of real estate loans. Even today, builders are complaining about the difficulty to get their projects funded. Just think of little home buyers. Now completely forget about FHA buyers. Low appraisals take most of them totally out of the market. I am sure that you heard stories about people spending up to a year trying to buy a house. These poor souls were being outbid by pro's.
Most homes were being sold to investment managers like BlackRock, rather than families. The interesting part is that this was no secret. Recently, BlackRock unveiled bonds made up from billions of dollars of securitized trounces of homes bought specifically to be rented. It should be clear that any home price increases were due to the vicious fight for inventory being waged between various investment managers.
Now put yourself in the shoes of builders. Imagine a market where capital is either too expensive or impossible to get. Add the fact that market prices for the goods you make are much lower than your cost to manufacture them. Then, consider that your main customer has yet to find reliable loan sources. Finally, think of the fact that the next generation of potential home buyers prefers to live at home with their parents.
All things being considered, there is simply no reason why builders should be upbeat.
Thankfully, they have enough sense as to not blame the weather. But the same can't be said about economists who insist that the weather is behind the malaise we are now seeing across the economy. From government to academia, naive optimism about a recovering real estate market abounded despite the evidence.

Don't blame the weather

In Robust Real Estate Hides TruthI described how the so called recovery lacked fundamental strength. The fact that a part-timer like myself can analyse the same data as the pro's and come to diverging conclusions isn't surprising. What's incredible is when the pro's see their models crashing back to earth after such a short time.
This is why I have a hard time thinking of economics as a science. Pseudo-scientists like economists are great at curve-fitting until they see what they want from charts. Real scientists would be glad to be surprised by the evidence rather than by the failure of their fully developed models.

Fear is stronger in this market

In a nutshell, this morning's news should have surprised no one. The home market is out of inventory and those who make the widgets have no incentive to make any more. These are the distortions typical when ineptitude is rampant among those who control the economic levers. So far, housing and employment have demonstrated the degree of market distortion and dysfunction that is our present reality. This despite a clueless president who continues to brag about his brand of recovery.
For now, keep walking people. There are no new news here!

2014/02/19 9:06 AM UpdateHousing Starts and New Housing Permits data collapse in January. From an expected 975,000 in New Housing Permits, the final number came in at a meager 937,000 for a 5.4% in month-to-month decline. New HomeStarts did worse. From the anticipated 950,000, the real number dropped by 16% when compared to last month to 880,000.Despite the now normal tendency to blame the weather, the West may tell a different story. The West fell by 26% in a Permits month-over-month comparison and by 17.4% in month-to-month New Home Starts. The West is the second largest component in the survey and was not affected by the weather. Whether this is a fluke or a fundamental indicator of a weak economy, time will tell. To me, this has an eerie resemblance to April, 2006. Despite clear fundamental flaws, the data had just begun to show housing weakness. Back then, it took two years for everyone to finally admit we had a problem. In 2006, the problem was irrational exuberance; too much of a good time. Today, the issue is incompetent malaise driven by a White House leadership that insists in maltreating capital and business; thus creating a level of uncertainty that can't be lifted by all the money pumping at the Fed and through the Japanese carry-trade industry.

Wednesday, February 12, 2014

What's happening to Venezuela? Is democracy failing them or is it totally absent?

I agree with the contemporary idea that democracy is not for everyone; especially democracy the way Americans define it. History shows plenty of communities where democratic levels were weak, yet progress abounded. Just look at China today.
Also consider the fact that a high degree of democracy in a nation of ignorance will lead to great consensus but definite failure.
Thus, I feel that Venezuela's problems did not arise from its democratic level. But, while democracy isn't for all, food surely is. The real shame of the Venezuelan regime is that it has turned one of the best economies in Latin America into a circus. Whether suffering from a shortage of toilet paper or milk, whether today or fifty years ago, these regimes have yet to learn that central planning by bureaucrats never succeeds.
The worst that could happen now is for oil to drop in price. The country would then have to borrow more from a market already reluctant to buy their bonds. But such is the luck of oil economies.
Income from high oil prices made Chavez' economic incompetence look like brilliance. When the price of oil is high, the leader in place looks like a hero. When oil goes down, the boss gets excommunicated.
The only constant is the dependency on high oil prices and the cyclicality of the pain. If only these so called leaders would help the economy diversify while things are cyclically great, the result would be the opposite. Instead, they opt to spend surplus funds on things that keep them in power; things that do not improve national productivity.
American's are very familiar with the problem. Borrowing money from the Chinese to acquire Wal-Mart stuff to fill their closets is wasteful. Buying Wal-Mart stuff results in the accumulation of things that nobody wants to buy from us. We become the end of the chain.The inverse took place during the fifties when any money borrowed went into business spending. Investing in businesses created things that others value. We were then an important part of the chain.
The formula is simple. Opt for saving rather than buying personal things; meanwhile invest aggressively in business for maximum results. While this article begins with a question about the source of Venezuela's difficulties, it is evident that the problems of Venezuela can easily replicate elsewhere; including the US. The only thing helping America is the fact that it is already diversified. Unlike Venezuela, the US has plenty of vibrant industries that have succeeded with or without government intervention. The problem for us is that, like Venezuela, our leadership is focused on the kind of entitlement spending that doesn't lead to the creation of things that others would want to buy. How does a union change whether others want to buy things from us or not? How effective is paying irresponsible teachers a higher wage when it comes to making our products more desirable? In either case the benefit is for either the unions or the irresponsible teachers only. They add zero value to our marketable products. In America, we are forgetting to curve personal spending and to invest in business first.
While I am not optimistic that Venezuela will recover any time soon, I am hopeful that we do. I would love to see us prioritize business investing once again.

Saturday, February 8, 2014

Is the consumer-borrowing party getting louder out of happiness or desperation?
Today, the Federal Reserve reported that consumer borrowing took a surprisingly large jump of $18.8 billion in December to $3.1 trillion for the year.
Some argue that this is due to the Christmas season. Others claim that it is a good sign that the economy is improving. Both are wrong.
I will remind those who think that the jump is due to Christmas of the fact that 2012 also had one of those. The total last year was $2.9 trillion compared with the $3.1 trillion for 2013. So the substantial increase was not due to the holidays.
With regards to higher borrowing being a sign of confidence, I would say that it is possible but improbable. While spending could be a sign of consumer confidence, I would instead expect to find the initial signs of confidence among employers. But so far I see none.

Nonfarm Productivity and Unit Labor Costs
by Haver Analytics

Employers hire employees when the balance between greed and fear tilts towards greed. Unfortunately, employers are acting with a bias towards fear. Fear makes them behave controlled and measured. On the other hand, greed creates stampedes. Fear drives efficiency up. Greed drives it down. The efficiency report from this week clearly showed that efficiency is way up. Productivity went up while unit of labor cost went down. Less input to more output equals higher efficiency. Again, this behavior is rather typical of fear periods.
The signs clearly point at a consumer who is using more credit cards not out of optimism but rather out of need. Consumers are rebuilding leverage again, but absent an economic boom this time. People are borrowing the money they don't have. If this assumption is correct, in a few months we will see unsecured-loan defaults rising. So be prepared just in case I am right and the extra spending isn't due to a better economy. In your shoes, I would not hold my breath.
I only wonder what it would take for people to remove the blinders. In 2006 I told anyone who would listen to skip buying a house. I told them all to sell their home instead and to rent one in the mean time. People thought it was a stupid idea.
Today, I see the same about the ineptitude of this White House. Here, Congress is not an excuse because they have always been trouble for any president. The variable this time is a president who has no clue of the social aspects of markets. He either does not understand what makes economies work or refuses to do the right thing. He is either incompetent or unethical; you chose. The fact is that there are not enough jobs being created. We need about 400K new jobs per month instead of the joke of a number we are getting.
The only reason for the low unemployment is the low participation. But here, the President argues that the low participation is due to Baby-boomers not seeking jobs. But this too does not match reality.

If boomers were no longer looking for jobs, there would be an excess of job openings in the jobs they previously held; jobs as managers and sales people. Instead, the lack of employee supply is for welding positions. These were not the jobs that most Baby-boomers had. They were insurance agents, traveling reps, real estate agents. Unfortunately, the real supply imbalance in these areas is one where there are not enough of these jobs for the many job seekers fighting for them. I recently saw a job listing for COO where more than 150 people applied for the one job. What? 150 Chief Operating Officers for just one job? This directly contradicts the assumption that jobs for the educated are plentiful. As someone commented in CNBC today, unemployment for those with college degrees remains about 4% higher than before the recession. So much for that spin.
In simple terms, the government's claim is just hiding the truth from naive citizens. I say naive because it seems clear to me that they wrongly elected the President because he sounded well while delivering empty speeches. If I had anyone of them read the speeches rather than hear Obama say them, they would think very differently of the message. So, let's just hope that this President does not take us so far into the hole that we can't recover later on.

As for the risk at hand, keep in mind that we already owe more money than any other country in the history of the planet. In a nutshell, your taxes (assuming you pay any) fall way short of what government spends. For every dollar in taxes, we ask the Chinese for 60% in extra loans. Soon they too will realize we just don't have any money.
The facts continue to contradict the White House's spin. While they can attempt to impress us with the best displays of curve-fitting by Nobel Prize economists, the fundamental reality continues to call attention to the fact that consumers are being squeezed, boomers are out of their jobs and employers are scared. Let's demand better leadership.

Thursday, January 30, 2014

Will you sell your business now that you are looking at retirement. What is your business worth?

How much is your business worth?

If you are like many baby-boomers, it is getting close to the time when you'll need to divest from your assets to pay for retirement. It is now time to sell the business. But how much is it worth?
There are many books and articles covering different ways to value a business. Some use profit multiples. Others look at revenues. And there are those from the tech-boom years that focus on future growth.
The reality of it all is that none of these methods matter if the author is not willing to buy the business from you. How much is a valuation worth if no one would pay it? In a market, prices are set by market players willing to sell or buy an asset. Everyone else is just noise.
Let's look at Apple's stock to help us understand better. Two days ago, on January 28th at 10:30 AM, AAPL reached a per-share valuation of $513.00. Today, also at 10:30 AM, each share dropped to $498.69. In just two days, the shares dropped $14.31.

The change in price was not due to earnings surprises or anything that could hurt valuation. In fact, Apple's earnings were announced on January, 27th, leaving enough time for the market to adjust.
Can an industry analyst argue that the company remains just as valuable today as it was two days ago? Yes, of course. I am even sure that the analyst would offer great reasons why the valuation should remain at the $513.00 price. But his opinion is garbage. To talk costs nothing and thus has no value. There is no way in hell that Apple is worth the $513.00 today. How do I know? Simple; because no one paid that price. No one who was willing to part from their cash was willing to do it at $513.00. And believe me, with close to 25 million shares sold, there were plenty of opportunities for someone to pay the higher price. Yet, not a single buyer did.
What's interesting is that all sellers would have preferred to sell at the higher price of two days ago. But with no willing buyers, they had to settle for the lower price. Alternatively, their other choice was to sit on the shares and not sell.
The same applies to your business. You may think that your business is worth, say, a million dollars. You may even have documented evidence of why it's worth the price. But does it mean that it's worth the million? No! Not if the highest bidder offers much less for it. This means that you too may have to select between taking a lower price or to not sell if your highest bid is lower than the million.
The problem here is that many business owners never plan an exit strategy. As a result, they usually try to sell the business when they have no more time to wait. This is why, after listing a business for sale with a broker, the owners often get tired and give up. They take home whatever inventory is left and break the lease. From one day to the next, a viable business is closed. Because of a lack of planning and the unwillingness to take a lower price, the owners run out of time and get nothing instead.

Do you have an exit strategy?

Think about it. How many people do you know who are out there looking to buy a business? How many have the money to do so? For sure, I know many people who want to start a business, but they are not thinking about buying one. In fact, most of them lack the business experience to know that brokers exist. Moreover, these aren't the kind of people who would walk into your business to ask if you would sell. So even with willing sellers, these buyer don't know where to find them. In short, there aren't enough buyers available who know where the sellers are. In technical terms, this means that the market of small businesses for sale lacks transparency and liquidity.
When it comes to buyers and sellers finding each other, selling a business is worse than the real estate market. Just the fact that a home seller is willing to advertise to everyone while the business seller isn't should clarify the reasons behind the difference.
Compare this to buying Apple stock. Within a fraction of a second, I can sell my APPL shares without any concern of who is at the other end of the transaction. There is plenty of liquidity in the Apple shares market. Furthermore, I know the exact price it is worth at any time. Pricing information is publicly available through the stock exchanges. Better yet, the price is not determined by analysts but by buyers putting out their cash. There is a high degree of transparency in this market. Clearly, selling your business lacks both, transparency and liquidity in the market. This means that selling requires adapting.

Time compensates for liquidity

What can you do? Well, first understand that allowing plenty of time is essential for a successful sale. This is the only way to compensate for the lack of market liquidity. Plan ahead. Don't leave this until your optimism for the business fades. Most people fail to plan because they think that tomorrow will be better than today. So they get their heads deep into the business. This means that the blinders only come off once they starts losing interest. By that time, doing what's necessary to get a higher valuation for the business will be impossible. It will be too late.
Remember that your goal all these years was to run the business in a way that would give you the highest standard of living rather than the highest valuation. They are not the same. In fact, many common business practices destroy valuations. Now that if this happens to you, don't worry; you are not the first.
Next, you should understand that any valuation given to you by an expert is garbage. The only valuation that you can take to the bank is that from a willing buyer with cash on hand. So, have some flexibility.
There is nothing wrong with thinking that you are the best negotiator in the world and that you will get the best deal; every business owner thinks the same. But no amount of negotiation will reliably help you sell your business if your valuation is unreasonable. If you ask me, I think that your odds would be close to those from playing the lottery. I would advise to take an alternative with a higher probability of success instead.
Think of the following:, buyers do not want to buy your business just to make you happy. Rather, real investors, the kind who would know how to find you, are interested in making money and don't care much about anything else.
To make money is not to buy and sell stuff. Many businesses buy and sell every day until they go bankrupt. High profit percentages aren't good enough either, if sales are so low that receipts do not cover costs. Even high profits in paper are useless. Most naive business owners fall under the trap of thinking that the P&L is all that matters to the business.
No! They don't want funny P&L's. Investors want positive net cash flows. Just look at what commercial banks measure when deciding on a loan for your business. Cash it's what matters. Even Warren Buffet is famous for looking at cash rather than the P&L.

When cash flows are negative

Did you know that Enron had great P&L's before they collapsed? Their whole mirage begun to unravel after short-seller Richard Grubman challenged Enron's CEO, Jeff Skilling, for the absence of a cash flow statement with their earnings during the earnings call on April 17, 2001. In paper, Enron was the most profitable company in the world. But, like a Ponzy scheme, they were running out of cash and needed to create new ways to get capital infusions to stay alive. Just like a Ponzy scheme, they eventually failed; leaving a trail of total devastation. They weren't producing any cash.
So tell me, how much is your business equipment worth if your business is not creating positive cash flows? The answer is "nothing". How much is the building worth, assuming that you own it, if there are no cash flows? Zero! Have you ever heard that many businesses are worth more broken apart than together? Well, you now know why. If your business is located in a building you own, I may advise to sell them separately. If the business produces very little cash, it will drag the value of the building down. Subsequently, a buyer looking at having to buy both may not be willing to pay the price you are asking for; which will surely make you think that the buyer is unreasonable. But in reality the opposite is true. Think of it in the following way. If a buyer seeks to get the highest return on his capital, why would he put cash into a asset that doesn't improve returns. Often, large capital outlays will reduce return on capital. This is why Dell's model is much more profitable than Apple's. Dell never had to use cash to buy a piece of inventory. Apple does.

What is your return on capital?

You see, to buy a building, the buyer will have to park a large amount of money in exchange for small savings with the hope that it will appreciate in the future. This is why businesses who keep a close eye on return on capital prefer to pass the burden of sinking lots of cash to financial institutions and opt to rent instead. This is a way to leverage other people's capital. The math is simple. If you can get higher returns on the cash you have by renting rather than buying, then rent. This is certainly the case when rapidly growing a business. It is best to put valuable cash into whatever yields the fastest turns. And buying a building achieves exactly the opposite. It turns scarce capital into slow money.
I can not stress enough the point that the way you run your business may not be what gets you the highest valuation. Things like high net cash flows, fast growth, and high returns on capital are very important when attracting serious buyers. As you can see, these three prioritize money. Your management style, on the other hand, prioritized you.
Finally, be flexible. Whenever I look for buyers, I always try to find what the buyer values more: P&L, Statements of Cash Flows or Balance Sheet. Are they seeking to show the highest difference between input and outputs? Are they in a capital intensive business or are they growing fast? Are they trying to improve their Debt Ratio? This is because a buyer may be willing to pay a higher price if it helps them improve cash. Terms are a great alternative in such cases. This brings me to asking you: which of the three is most important to you. Knowing what matters to you and to the buyer will help you both get a deal where everybody gets what they want. The message here is that you need to customize to get the best deal.
In conclusion, plan your exit as soon as possible. Do not wait a minute more. After your business earns you a comfortable living, learn the things that can get you a higher valuation. Incorporate this knowledge into your business. Give yourself time to find the best buyer. Be flexible with the price. There are ways to exchange an asset for something other than just cash-at-front. Be creative when making the deal. Good luck.

Important Disclaimer

The information contained in this blog is for educational purposes only. It is not intended to be legal, financial, tax, investment or any other type if licensed and regulated advice. There are no implied or explicit buy/sell recommendations. Alberto A. Lopez and all parties mentioned in the blog can not be held liable for actions taken by readers of this blog. To properly evaluate your specific case, seek professional help from an attorney, CPA, investment professional, or the corresponding professional agent licensed in your state.